bonds
The $42 billion in bonds that the voters passed last fall were merely a down payment on a long list of deferred transportation projects. The battle over the first $4.5 billion turned into an exercise of "robbing Peter to pay Paul" as eugene notes. That was inevitable. The fights between inland and costal, north and south will continue as the rest of the funds are doled out. The fund will be empty soon and there will still be projects that need to be completed. California has been underfunding its infrastructure for decades. Clearing that backlog will be expensive and take many years.
Here is Walters in the SacBee:
When California more or less stopped building infrastructure, especially highways and water facilities, three decades ago on the mistaken assumption that its growth was slowing (an "era of limits," then-Gov. Jerry Brown proclaimed), the state had about 22 million people. Now it has more than 37 million and is adding human beings at the rate of 5 million-plus a decade.
Both transportation and water officials are blunt about needing infinitely more money -- perhaps 10 times as much in the case of highways -- to do what's required. And in his State of the State address in January, Schwarzenegger called for doubling up on last year's bonds during the next couple of election cycles as part of a long-range infrastructure improvement program that could reach a staggering $500 billion.
Not all of the infrastructure are roads and mass transit, only about $140 billion. You know...chump change. From yesterday's LAT:
The commission staff estimates that California requires up to $140 billion in highway and mass transit improvements to keep the state moving.
According to Caltrans, the percentage of highways in the state deemed congested rose from 32 to 43 from 1992 to 2002. Caltrans defines congestion as rush-hour traffic that moves at 35 mph or less.
At about the same time, the state's population grew by 21% while the number of miles in the highway system rose by only 3%.
Our budget is already structurally imbalanced, so there is not exactly a bunch of money laying around to spend. There are three ways this could go. Arnold wants to borrow. Democrats generally prefer to raise taxes. Republicans want to privatize everything. Or I guess there could be a fourth, which is doing nothing. That is what we did to end up with this backlog in the first place. Somehow I dont think that is the best option.
Expect a lot of public debate on the issue. Despite what Arnold thinks, the public won't put up with putting everything on the state's credit card that he supposedly cut up years ago.
